Based om the book of Kings, the northern kingdom (Israel) cnsisted of ten tribes which were lost to the Assyrians. However a careful reading of the earlier books (Joshua and Judges) has Simeon being absorbed within Judah long before the king Saul reigned, so the north had only nine tribes. Why hasn't this error been ever corrected?
ten lost tribes of Israel
- Thread starter mathman
- Start date
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
The world was not made in 6 days either.
You can't just "correct" source texts. They are what they are.
That^^^ The text has been considered too holy to change, except for translation and later translation errors.
Plus, it would be an editor's worst nightmare, trying to correct the errors of fact and math, trying to reconcile the contradictions and discrepancies and redundancies. For example, what would you do with Abram and Sarah? They played the badger game on two different powerful kings, who both fell for her at first sight, and paid extortion for it - when Abram was nothing but an itinerant herdsman. Indeed, that's why God told him to lie.
Plus, it would be an editor's worst nightmare, trying to correct the errors of fact and math, trying to reconcile the contradictions and discrepancies and redundancies. For example, what would you do with Abram and Sarah? They played the badger game on two different powerful kings, who both fell for her at first sight, and paid extortion for it - when Abram was nothing but an itinerant herdsman. Indeed, that's why God told him to lie.
Does it matter?
I suppose if you really want to know, you can find it in the commentaries.
I suppose if you really want to know, you can find it in the commentaries.
Because it's not really an error.
Judges, ca. 11th century BCE, describes what is going on in its time, which is the rule of Judges (1228-879 BCE); the Book of Joshua is itself historically unreliable, and is actually more contemporary with the Books of Kings. In function, the Book of Joshua asserts continuity of covenant and authority.
Generally speaking, Deuteronomistic history is a traditional, theological, and historical reflection on the loss of Judah; in this context, we might note the Books of Kings covers a period ending in 560 BCE. Accounting for all Ten Tribes becomes important when we consider the point that it was 574 BCE when the first two Tribes were formally expelled, and 566 BCE for the next two, and the expulsions complete in 556 BCE.
If I wrote a novel in 21st century American English and then tried to pass it off as an authentic medieval English tale, you'd all call bullshit on that. So what's with claiming that a collection of books was given to a prophet on a mountaintop in 1300 BC when it's written in 500 BC dialect?
And how could Moses have fled from Egypt to Canaan when Canaan was already colonized and settled by Egypt?
And how could Moses have fled from Egypt to Canaan when Canaan was already colonized and settled by Egypt?
The religion "British Israel" has it that one of the tribes , Dan, went up north, not just to, but past the Euphrates, and founded the city of Gdansk (Danzig)
The counting of tribes varied too, whether it was talking of territories ( the tribe of Levi had none.)
so, Bible wrong in gen: 1;1, and talking snake, talking donkeys. not supporting just observing.
I guess that phrase "Simeon absorbed within Judah" doesn't imply Simeon's descendants lost their identity.
An attempt to create a new Kingdom of Israel in Ukraine at the beginning of the 1st millennium (The Thirteen Tribe: The Khazar Empire and its Heritage, by Arthur Koestler) shows Simeon's descendants claiming their ancestry outside of Judah and Levy.
But, lets play the game that Simeon was attached as part of Judah, even when -as an example- in Judges 1:3 only says: And Judah said unto Simeon his brother, Come up with me into my lot, that we may fight against the Canaanites; and I likewise will go with thee into thy lot. So Simeon went with him. No assimilation implied.
The blessings of Moses ignored Simeon but when it was about Joseph, Moses clarifies the blessings to his two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, and here you can have two tribes instead of one, and at the end you still have your "ten lost tribes".
An attempt to create a new Kingdom of Israel in Ukraine at the beginning of the 1st millennium (The Thirteen Tribe: The Khazar Empire and its Heritage, by Arthur Koestler) shows Simeon's descendants claiming their ancestry outside of Judah and Levy.
But, lets play the game that Simeon was attached as part of Judah, even when -as an example- in Judges 1:3 only says: And Judah said unto Simeon his brother, Come up with me into my lot, that we may fight against the Canaanites; and I likewise will go with thee into thy lot. So Simeon went with him. No assimilation implied.
The blessings of Moses ignored Simeon but when it was about Joseph, Moses clarifies the blessings to his two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, and here you can have two tribes instead of one, and at the end you still have your "ten lost tribes".
(Based on book of Joshua) The twelve tribes under Joshua did not include Levi (priestly tribe) , so having Joseph split did not increase the number. Simeon did not get its own area, but rather cities within the Judah area.
Look, you might be correct that in a political map the tribes of Simeon and Levy might became "invisible" but those tribes weren't assimilated by the tribe of Judah because the descendants of Simeon, Levy and Benjamin always preserved their identity before the exile, and several of them when in exile.
Elijah the prophet knew he was a Benjamite, same with Shaul the apostle.
Remember that the exiled ones were populations not lands.
The southern kingdom (called Judah - later Judea) contained the areas of Judah plus Benjamin and also Simeon descendants. The Levites were the priestly tribe for all Israel. Jews with the name Cohen and its variations are supposedly priests while Levi are non-priest tribe members.
Hmm. I thought Cohen is from the high priest family, which were Levite, not so from Judah.